Wormerine

Yak-0. It could be because it was my first one, but from the ones I played so far (Yak0-3+LaD) it was the one with the most coherent storyline.

Finished Yakuza: Like a Dragon. I think it is my 2nd favourite in the series so far, even though I rather disliked the combat. Combat’s only saving grace is presentation and trademark Yakuza wackiness, though once I got to the bit where I had to grind I lost any patience I had for it. I also found the fan service near the end of the game to be much too heavy handed. I like Ichi as protagonist. He fits both melodramatic and silly parts of Yakuza. Having a party of characters is a nice change.

I think there is a difference of enjoying someone company, and enjoyment coming from interacting with other players only. I also disagree with the latter half. I would say most of my fav games would be worse with a company. Backseat or otherwise.

I finished Forgotten City. Very very junky, and "true" ending is incredibly corny but I enjoyed my time with it. Played it through gamepass, and that's the way I would suggest trying it out, as I think it is greatly overpriced. It took me less then 6 hours to thoroughly explore, and the experience is rather janky. Entertaining nonetheless.

I have been watching top-tens and there really is no GOTY contender - at least on PC. Returnal looks interesting but didn't play it.

Good luck. There is a lot of it to soldier through.

No more NieR. Maybe. Probably not.

From the ones I actually know stuff about: Elden Ring and Hitman3 Stuff I am looking forward to learning more about: Obsidian Trinity (Avowed, Outer Worlds2, Pentiment) Tactical Breach Wizards Sings of Conquest Metal Slug Tactics

I really liked how DMC5 looked - it’s a nice mix of “realism” and over the top absurd. I remember having doubts about this character from trailers, but honestly, it works in context. DMC5, just like Bayonetta - you play it for gameplay. Everything else is absurd, loud, and occasionally entertaining in its own right. Best actions games out there, though. EDIT. SD looks very good. Being able to swap out the sticks is a great info - that’s a main thing I would worry about In handheld like that. More consoles and peripherals should allow swapping of components like that. It might be a bit too price for me to ever get one, though. I don’t travel that much nor feel a need to have a gaming device while on the go these days.

I did. And I hated it. Dark Souls style boss just didn't fit that game.

I am glad you are liking it!

Finished Sekiro. And just in time for December gaming break.

I did. In Fallout1 timer might have not been there, in Kingmaker it was one of the conflicting design choices which made it insuffarable for myself. Darn I loved the game. And in spite of loving it, I never got close to finishing it. I think last time I tried I got stuck in some tree city thingy.

Finally a Deathloop review that aligns more or less with my personally experience with the game

As Oner said. Knowledge that Fallout1's timer is generous comes from metaknowledge. In my case, from looking it online and learning that: 1) I don't need to worry about it 2) there are ways to extend it if I need it. And if the situation is "time is generous enough that you can complete everything in the game before it runs out". Then there is no point to the timer being in the game in the first place. It adds to new player anxiety while objectively not adding anything of value to the game. Fallout1 with or without timer plays and works the same, only missing the failed ending if you manage to have it run out. People don't like it, when it is implimented in games not fit for it. If you create a handcrafter RPG when you want players to explore (or demand for them to explore) then threatning them with gameover if they explore too much is not what you want in your game. If you don't want them to access all content - then fine. But then you need to give players a way to gauge how much content they can do before running out of time, and what more or less can be consequences of ignoring content. and IMO even so, there are better ways of achieving it in a cRPG then a timer.

I think it is simplifying problem. I am not against racing against the clock by priciple. I am big fan of roguelites (in this bit I will quite Invisible Inc) and the very premise is about picking what you will be able to do and gain and make hard choices. The problem is that RPG so far haven't been well designed for that. Same with resting system, resource management etc. I am not against those things, but they need to be implemented in appropriate setting. A handcrafted open RPG designed to have enjoyable side content is not a place where a timer adds something positive. Perhaps RPG makes should reconsider stories they are writing, I will agree with that. Back to my Sekiro. I knew the previous fight I mentioned was suspiciously easy and basic (no perilious attacks at all?) Uff ,the real version took me a few tries and was far more satisfying

Uf, I disagree. Timers like that (or ones in Kingamer) add problems instead of fixing anything. One either designs the game so it is about making choices on what to do (or in what order to do them like in Alpha protocol) or one doesn't. I find adding generous timers, just so there is illusion of pressure frustrating - do I need to rush through the story? Does timer not matter (it really doesn't in fallout and kingmaker? It's a pointless addition, which creates unnecessary frustration and anxiety on first playthrough, and is irrelevant on consequent playthoughs.

Fair enough, though personally I didn’t find it to be the case. I felt at times compelled to continue story back to back, and at others I felt it gave me a breather to do other stuff. There were one or two instances in particular when the game gave you narrative reasons to not progress the story immediately. I often have the issue you are describing in other open world games, but not in tW3. Or it might have been just me wanting to play more Gwent. You know, I would have a session when I would do storyline, and I would have sessions where I would do side stuff. Perhaps, they are more separate in my mind, then they were for you. I also avoided using fast travel, unless here was literally nothing on the way - so a lot of “openworld busy work” was part of the journey for me, rather then a distraction.

27 hours into Sekiro and still digging it. Here is posing after fight. Just did some reading on the endings, and it seems I am mostly set for the good good ending, but as is tradition there is alternative version of Hirata Estate that I would have missed otherwise.

Ufff, I thought it was the worst by far. It didn't quite transition into action combat yet, with animations having little to do with actual hit detection making it more invasive then W1, but not engaging as an action RPG. tW2 is probably the most interesting out of the three with it's reactivity being the most ambitious I have seen to date, and a prime example of why "real reactivity" (unique content based on our actions) isn't necessarily a good thing. Witcher3 is easily the best of the three IMO. There isn't a single thing that 1&2 do better then Witcher3 - better gameplay, better world, better quests, better story, best balance between book continuation and new story, most faithful to the characters etc. etc. Need to give it 2nd playthrough. I adore Witcher1 as well. Witcher2 is... interesting. A lot of cool ambitious and fresh ideas that don't quite pan out.

Never played Halo before, so it is my first one. So far feels like a better Far Cry. Combat seems competently put together, and so far seems to have a decent amount of variety. Difficulty seems tight enough to make tools at player disposal valuable. There is a lot of stuff, yes - core DnD painted over with Larian's D:OS inspired mechanics. Unfortunately, there isn't much to consider as the game is terribly balanced as of now. It's been moving in a right direction but for now it is still - figure out one of couple broken "tactics" in the game, and repeat it over and over again. If balanced properly, think it could be the first RPG with actually decent tactical combat. Tight design has not been Larian's motto - they seem to prioritise meme generation, over coherent gameplay.

The closest to any information we got is this written Windows Central article. When it comes to "classes" and abilities It seems Avowed is paying a closer homage to Pillars of Eternity then I expected, so I wouldn't be shocked if there was a selection of races to choose from. Characters with various hights would present unique design challenges, but I also think it could be very interesting. I suppose it all depends on how the combat works. They could just stick to races of a more equal statue - like Human/elves/godlike. Everything so far indicates that Avowed will be first person only.

Double post

Comment edit fail

Yes, I didn't feel like TOW really forced players to make hard decisions and consider their characters viewpoint. Main quests tended to have simply formula of faction A path, faction B path, more difficult to achieve centric C path, which just seems to be overall better for everyone involved. Unless one is trying to saw chaos and destruction path C always seems to be the most desirable path to follow. I suspect, however, that it is also why OW1 was such an easy title to swallow. We were presented with variety of choices, while making the act of choosing not agonising (as it can be in Pillars of Eternity).